EPTTL Mafia XLVIII - Page 14
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21170 Posts
BC's Arkham Asylum These are the last two scum games I was in. I was scum in iGrok's Paranoid Mafia I think, but I flaked out of that one and proceeded to get banned for inactivity. | ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
Prplhz, in the post where you said, "Just want to sit around and wait for power roles to do our job," where you intending for the word our to be concerning alignment and thus mean, "Just want to sit around and wait for power roles to do the town's job." I am not saying that you are saying that is the blue's job to win the game or anything I am just trying to clear it up that you intended for that sentence to imply that the blue roles will do their job and your choice of pronoun was a result of blues sharing alignment with greens. Correct? | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
Sure if palmar would make those statements or some of the other vets that'd be crazy but I think what happened so far was nothing special. I do not like the fact that so many people are not posting (or just posting a little). If someone wants my opinion on something that happened so far shoot me a question but as mentioned I haven't seen something scummy from vets yet and that stuff comming from people who are new or kind of new is more looking like townie who are just saying what they think right now. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
I did not claim blue and I did not slip blue. I meant what Radfield wrote later; "Do you just want to sit around and wait for power roles to do the job (finding scum) that town is supposed to do by/for itself?" Now can we PLEASE, as a culture, move on? | ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
Opens with a random vote on prplhz (rng). Too safe a vote that provides nothing. Even calls it bad. Really searching for ways that are not scum hunting to find a day1 lynch. Radfield even agrees that he says RNG lynch is bad and then votes via a RNG. I get that you are saying vote != lynch but I refuse to not hold someone accountable (which would mean not take note of) for their votes. At the very least, he has made a vote that is clearly prestated to be worthless and that alone is scummy. You can't even use such a vote to pressure someone as the scum will just ignore worthless votes. He goes then to On December 04 2011 23:18 Radfield wrote: What about no lynching? That is an option in this set-up. Where would you rank it? So now we have RNG vote that he made sure to preamble with how worthless such a vote is followed by bringing up no-lynch. My feelings of his scummyness are based completely on his RNG way of having a throwaway vote that he is now safely hidden behind (on a player that for a bit was softclaimed as blue) and his then push to no lynch. I really dislike this post about the no lynch idea- On December 05 2011 01:33 Radfield wrote: If we end up no-lynching today, that is ok(although non-optimal). Keep in mind our Day 1 goals: 1. Create a positive atmosphere. Clarity, no arguing, etc. 2. Get everyone's votes and thoughts down on paper. Force scum to bullshit about who they want to lynch and why. 3. Establish baselines of activity for players for use in future days. Again, a no-lynch is not the end of the world, but we don't want to enter the day with a mindset of no-lynching. We want to enter the day planning to find scummy players, and gather a majority. You don't need to be able to 'read' anyone. Support people making sense, lynch people who are playing poorly. Past experience with players is useful, but not essential by any means. Even if you don't think you can find scum, contribute and make sure you don't get mistaken for one(assuming you are town). He mentions some truth and not so good things in a mixed up manner here. No lynches make day 1 worthless and the daytime is the time that the town has power. The town is an uninformed majority (or else the game is over) and a majority controls the lynch. In his list of 3 goals for day 1 I find goal 1 to be one that is there to just discredit aggressive players, point 2 is 100% correct and the only real goal, and point 3 is a neutral fall back thing to state as any alignment. He says a no lynch isnt the end of the world but then makes it clear how we should never start of thinking it is a goal. I really think he is trying to subtlety push this option. He doesn't want to get labeled as pushing it but is trying to bring up every small detail that can be viewed as positive for such a end to the day. His 2nd goal, the one that matters the most and is the most correct, is the one that he is not doing himself. I find that to be scummy as hell. He KNOWS the reasons for needed votes and cases and yet has a RNG vote (that he declared before making was worthless via stating that RNG isn't useful). | ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
Do you disagree? | ||
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
 I assure, I will very much be pushing or supporting a lynch today. In addition, if my 'random' vote stays on prp all day, THEN you can call me scummy(and I will agree), but the day is not yet half over, and I'm not going to bounce around like a madman. My vote served it's purpose. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
All my concerns were addressed with that post by Radfield. | ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
| ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On December 05 2011 07:55 vaderseven wrote: He mentions some truth and not so good things in a mixed up manner here. No lynches make day 1 worthless and the daytime is the time that the town has power. The town is an uninformed majority (or else the game is over) and a majority controls the lynch. In his list of 3 goals for day 1 I find goal 1 to be one that is there to just discredit aggressive players, point 2 is 100% correct and the only real goal, and point 3 is a neutral fall back thing to state as any alignment. He says a no lynch isnt the end of the world but then makes it clear how we should never start of thinking it is a goal. I really think he is trying to subtlety push this option. He doesn't want to get labeled as pushing it but is trying to bring up every small detail that can be viewed as positive for such a end to the day. His 2nd goal, the one that matters the most and is the most correct, is the one that he is not doing himself. I find that to be scummy as hell. He KNOWS the reasons for needed votes and cases and yet has a RNG vote (that he declared before making was worthless via stating that RNG isn't useful). I interpreted what he said as disagreeing with me and some other people who said a no-lynch is the worst possible option for town. I think he just wants to imply that a "probably-/maybe-townielynch" is worse than a no-lynch and I just don't think so. He wants to have this option as a final save I guess, instead of lynching someone he thinks is a townie. However I think he's wrong with that one because as far as I can see a no-lynch will be ruining town-atmosphere. A no-lynch happens when there's no majority so town splits up, which does not have to be the end of the world but if there's noone telling us which side was right it will give us a 2nd day that's just the very same discussion again, with everyone who thought his choice on day1 was right thinking his choice is still right and the other way arround. If that happens town atmosphere is really screwed imo. Happened 2 games ago to me and I don't want it to happen again. I was a blue in a beginners-mini and said something along the lines "everyone please start posting, no matter if you're blue or green we need you and if you're a blue trying to hide that really gives you away". So a bunch of people came along and said I'm scum because I'm telling blues to reveal themselves and they tried to lynch me and someone else. A no-lynch happened and we had the same scenario for 3 days until I got shot on night3 by mafia. Days 1 and 2 were wasted because there was a huge fight over who of us two is actually mafia, day 3 was wasted because of a shitty decision that had nothing to do with that. Sooooo, I don't really want that to happen again. | ||
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
On December 05 2011 07:55 vaderseven wrote: He mentions some truth and not so good things in a mixed up manner here. No lynches make day 1 worthless and the daytime is the time that the town has power. The town is an uninformed majority (or else the game is over) and a majority controls the lynch. In his list of 3 goals for day 1 I find goal 1 to be one that is there to just discredit aggressive players, point 2 is 100% correct and the only real goal, and point 3 is a neutral fall back thing to state as any alignment. He says a no lynch isnt the end of the world but then makes it clear how we should never start of thinking it is a goal. I really think he is trying to subtlety push this option. He doesn't want to get labeled as pushing it but is trying to bring up every small detail that can be viewed as positive for such a end to the day. His 2nd goal, the one that matters the most and is the most correct, is the one that he is not doing himself. I find that to be scummy as hell. He KNOWS the reasons for needed votes and cases and yet has a RNG vote (that he declared before making was worthless via stating that RNG isn't useful). No lynches do NOT make day 1 useless. However, I agree that no lynching is bad, and that we don't want to do it. Lets leave it at that. Goal One is absolutely not there to discredit aggressive townies. There is a very big difference between being aggressive and shitting up the thread. Two players arguing back and forth is awful for a town, mafia is allowed to coast, and can easily redirect attention. Two players calmly discussing reads can work wonders(read Mini mafia X with Palmar and Sandroba). I'm stating that one of our primary goals is to keep the thread moving appropriately, and down avenues that are constructive to town. Aggression is just fine: Redff is being aggressive, and I like it. prplhz is being someone aggressive, and it's good too. Annul is also aggressive, and doing a fine job. No problems with any of their play so far. Point 3 is also important. Scum players tend to be more active at the beginning of a game, and taper off as the game goes on. Town players tend to do the opposite. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On December 05 2011 08:09 Toadesstern wrote: I interpreted what he said as disagreeing with me and some other people who said a no-lynch is the worst possible option for town. I think he just wants to imply that a "probably-/maybe-townielynch" is worse than a no-lynch and I just don't think so. He wants to have this option as a final save I guess, instead of lynching someone he thinks is a townie. However I think he's wrong with that one because as far as I can see a no-lynch will be ruining town-atmosphere. A no-lynch happens when there's no majority so town splits up, which does not have to be the end of the world but if there's noone telling us which side was right it will give us a 2nd day that's just the very same discussion again, with everyone who thought his choice on day1 was right thinking his choice is still right and the other way arround. If that happens town atmosphere is really screwed imo. Happened 2 games ago to me and I don't want it to happen again. I was a blue in a beginners-mini and said something along the lines "everyone please start posting, no matter if you're blue or green we need you and if you're a blue trying to hide that really gives you away". So a bunch of people came along and said I'm scum because I'm telling blues to reveal themselves and they tried to lynch me and someone else. A no-lynch happened and we had the same scenario for 3 days until I got shot on night3 by mafia. Days 1 and 2 were wasted because there was a huge fight over who of us two is actually mafia, day 3 was wasted because of a shitty decision that had nothing to do with that. Sooooo, I don't really want that to happen again. Actually I think i was a VT that game and a blue the game before that. Not important at all but I guess I should say it nevertheless :p | ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
I have to agree that what I call slap fights are awful for the town but aggression is good. I agree with your clarifications on all the matters. What a joy to have someone that responds quickly (luck there most likely, you are around and I am around), without saying 'u dumb/bad', and logically. I see where syllo is coming from now saying that you are a good player. | ||
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
On December 05 2011 08:09 Toadesstern wrote: I interpreted what he said as disagreeing with me and some other people who said a no-lynch is the worst possible option for town. I think he just wants to imply that a "probably-/maybe-townielynch" is worse than a no-lynch and I just don't think so. He wants to have this option as a final save I guess, instead of lynching someone he thinks is a townie. However I think he's wrong with that one because as far as I can see a no-lynch will be ruining town-atmosphere. A no-lynch happens when there's no majority so town splits up, which does not have to be the end of the world but if there's noone telling us which side was right it will give us a 2nd day that's just the very same discussion again, with everyone who thought his choice on day1 was right thinking his choice is still right and the other way arround. If that happens town atmosphere is really screwed imo. Happened 2 games ago to me and I don't want it to happen again. I was a blue in a beginners-mini and said something along the lines "everyone please start posting, no matter if you're blue or green we need you and if you're a blue trying to hide that really gives you away". So a bunch of people came along and said I'm scum because I'm telling blues to reveal themselves and they tried to lynch me and someone else. A no-lynch happened and we had the same scenario for 3 days until I got shot on night3 by mafia. Days 1 and 2 were wasted because there was a huge fight over who of us two is actually mafia, day 3 was wasted because of a shitty decision that had nothing to do with that. Sooooo, I don't really want that to happen again. I would definitely prefer no-lynching over lynching someone I have a strong town read on. However that was not really my point. My point is that even if we wind up at a no-lynch, we still gain a lot of valuable information from the day, and that it's no reason to get upset or feel like town is now at a disadvantage. The reason town atmosphere gets screwed (imo) is not because of the no-lynch, but rather due to the reactions to a no-lynch. The real problem with your scenario is that players were not willing to change their reads. Day 2 is NOT the same as Day 1, no matter if there is a lynch or not. Your reads should be constantly evolving and narrowing down onto scum, hence why even in no-flip(alignment not revealed on death) games towns can still do decently. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
On December 05 2011 08:16 vaderseven wrote: I guess I just can't get over the wifom element of point 3 but I am also the type that posts alot no matter what. In all fairness, point 3 is not nearly as important, and is just something I generally do. It's really just a corollary of point number 2. I imagine if you read the townie guides you would not find it in there | ||
| ||
